Letters: Mount Soledad cross, Korean War and more

What’s next for the Mount Soledad cross?

Technically the Supreme Court’s refusal to consider the cross decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (“Supreme Court won’t hear Mt. Soledad cross case,” utsandiego.com, June 25) means the cross has to come down. Practically it means some politician in San Diego will have to stand and say “Take it down. It’s against the Constitution.” That isn’t going to happen in a city dominated by Christians.

The domination of the minority will continue. – Keith Taylor, Chula Vista

Letters and commentary policy

The U-T welcomes and encourages community dialogue on important public matters. Please visit this page for more details on our letters and commentaries policy.

It never fails to amaze me how Christians can actually claim the cross is a memorial for all religions. What part of cross and Christianity don’t they understand? There is no other religion that uses the cross as its symbol. Christians simply want their religion to dominate all others. No matter how they try and obfuscate the issue that will not change.

‘Forgotten War’ still in overtime

I scanned the June 25 edition of the U-T San Diego and was extremely disappointed to note that there was not one item mentioning this was the date of the beginning of the Korean conflict in 1950.

For those who served their country at that time as well as those 50,000 Americans who did not come home, this should never be accepted as the “Forgotten War.” Unfortunately, it was the first war that we were prevented from winning. It was declared a tie and after 62 years we are still in overtime. The media and the schools should never allow our children to be unaware of such an important era in our nation’s history. – Mel Mones, Rancho Bernardo

An inconsistency in ideology

In “For GOP VP: Rubio or Rice” (Editorial, June 24), the U-T Editorial Board has made it clear that it is ideologically on the right wing of the American political spectrum. “The best government is that which governs least” sums up one of its ideologies.

Yet the board is calling on all politicians to make sure that sequestration is avoided (“Mission critical: a call to action” (Editorial, June 24) because the cuts to the defense budget would be disastrous to the San Diego economy. By acknowledging how critical federal spending is to the health of our local economy, the board is exposing the biggest inconsistency in their ideology. Out of one side of its collective mouth it tells us government spending doesn’t create jobs. Out of the other side they say that if government spending is cut 30,000 local jobs will be lost.

Yet when it comes to military spending, the U-T scrutinizes little, and now criticizes that there may be any cuts at all. What?! Where’s the concern for budget balancing? Reigning in government spending? Waste, fraud, lack of contract oversight, unneeded weapons systems, ad nauseam? Remember “Duke” Cunningham?

Given that the U.S. spends nearly 50 percent of its annual budget on the military – an amount equal to that of most of the rest of the world combined – and has no enemies (China? Russia? Islamofacists?) anywhere near rivaling our military, it seems the U-T could do far more good scrutinizing the Department of Defense budget with the same zeal it does other government agencies than flatly opposing cuts simply because they may hurt the local economy or some vague, unsupported claim that our national security will be endangered. – Sam Sykes, San Diego

School site and fairy shrimp

The U-T’s reporting of the ongoing saga of Jonas Salk Elementary School in Mira Mesa (“Species Act puts school in national spotlight,” June 25) missed several facts which are essential to the local context of the issue.

The funding for the school was raised under Proposition MM, a bond issue approved by city voters in 1998. Jonas Salk Elementary is the last of the school projects funded by Proposition MM. This funding is fully in place and cannot legally be used for any other purpose.

The article correctly notes that the habitat in question is “nonnative.” Prior to grading for school construction, the site was a hilltop with no vernal pools supporting the San Diego fairy shrimp. Unauthorized activity after grading “created” the habitat and brought the species to the site. The litigation originally responsible for delaying the project was predicated in part on the premise that it was not possible to “create” habitat suitable to conserve a species such as the San Diego fairy shrimp. The presence of the habitat at the Salk Elementary site objectively refutes this premise; if it possible to create a habitat by accident, it is certainly possible to create one on purpose elsewhere to mitigate the loss of habitat at the Salk site.

Lastly, the local context of the issue revolves around a community which prizes its canyonlands and nature trails. Mira Mesa residents appreciate the protections afforded the environment by the Endangered Species Act. But we are looking for federal officials to honor the requirements already presented to San Diego Unified by issuing the required permits upon their satisfaction. We are asking that the goal posts not be constantly moved.

Oct. 28, 2014, will mark what would have been the 100th birthday of Dr. Jonas Salk. Mira Mesa eagerly wishes to celebrate this birthday by dedicating the campus of Dr. Jonas Salk Elementary in his honor. – John Horst, secretary, Mira Mesa Community Planning Group

Why doesn’t the proposed school just incorporate some of the vernal pools onto the campus? Teach the kids about migrating and local species. This could be the school’s charter. It might even beget the school added funding and plant the seeds of knowledge for future careers in green technologies, biology and conservation. – Angie Ringer, La Mesa

Spat over vets' center

I can’t believe VA San Diego would rather put veterans with traumatic brain injuries and sobriety issues next to an elementary school than find a more suitable location (“Council to decide fate of VA center,” Local, June 25). A mile away there is a seedy stretch of Rosecrans Street near Interstate 5 that has been a sorry gateway to Old Town State Park for too long. It’s a blight waiting to be redeveloped. There’s even the county Department of Mental Health building across the street. They can make referrals for each other.

The Old Town Academy voiced objections last January. Why didn’t VA listen? Six months have been wasted not listening, like throwing research linking smoking to cancer in the trash can. Would Dr. Smith of San Diego VA care to share the details of these other places where “students volunteer to interact with veterans.” I’m sure the students are bused to a facility and interact with veterans during limited hours with adequate security. – Patti Martin, Downtown San Diego

In response to “Transitional center would aid veterans” (Opinion, June 22): I hope you realize the great need and obligation we have to the recently returned military in San Diego. Please support the Aspire Project for all the vets and the proud heritage San Diego has to and for the Military. – Chaplain Bob Holloway, Military Order Of The Purple Heart, La Mesa

Uncertainty for Egypt

In response to “Islamist Morsi wins Egypt presidential vote” (utsandiego.com, June 24): 1) Egyptians revolted against Mubarak for more freedom.

2) They voted in the Muslim Brotherhood (the parent party of Hamas) that is an absolute fanatic “Islamic terrorist” supporting party instead!

3) Likely first victim: Egyptian women, whose rights, such as they are, will disappear under sharia law. A huge step backward. They may have to wear burqua-like garments and lose the right to vote or drive a car like in Saudi Arabia.

4) Likely second victims: Coptic Christians, secular citizens and all minorities will lose their rights. Many of them will have to flee Egypt after thousands of years.

5) Likely third victim: The treaty with Israel, possibly leading to war.

Poor Egypt. – Sam Warren, Hillcrest

Mirror Madrid

The estimable professor Michael Stepner’s idea (“Lessons from Madrid,” Business, June 25) that land planners in Madrid, Spain, should pay attention to their constituents and reduce top-down planning is a quite good one. It’s a good idea for San Diego too.

Planning in San Diego is increasingly top-down. Citizens are ignored. Some are even considered enemies of the city, enemies of good planning, impediments to progress. Our Community Planning System, the linchpin of good planning and community engagement, has been under attack from the mayor and his friends for more than six years now – still is today – for no more reason than that it wants genuine constituent engagement.

Stepner’s idea to add amenities (he calls them “services”) in communities where density is to be increased, with or without community approval, is an old one; often promised by land planners, public and private; rarely if ever fulfilled. A San Diego community today, if it is smart, will ignore promises of increased and improved amenities, including transportation amenities, and will outright oppose bad planning, including top-down density increases.

One regrets that such is the right thing to do, but in San Diego’s land-planning environment, a community opinion or preference has about a snowball’s chance to be adopted. We welcome Stepner’s recommendation. – Jim Varnadore, City Heights

Protecting faith freedoms is paramount

In response to Laurie Hall (Letters, June 25, in reference to “Faiths oppose contraception policy,” June 21): The Catholic Church does not decide what everyone else “is allowed to have.” It demands the right guaranteed it under our U.S. Constitution, First Amendment, to not be forced to do ANYTHING their own religion prohibits, no matter how much anyone else, like the government, or women, or Nancy Pelosi, want it to do. Remember why the Pilgrims came to America?

Contraception, abortion and sterilization are prohibited as a matter of church doctrine, irrespective of what individuals believe or practice. Why shouldn’t government order (trained) rabbis to stop circumcising babies, blessing food, priests from saying Mass, hearing confession, Jehovah’s Witnesses from walking the street for a couple of years in attempting to convert? It is no different.

Government cannot, by fiat, order the church to conform its religion to [the government’s] rules; this is exactly what the First Amendment protects against. Either protect this freedom of religion or watch other freedoms protected by the same amendment be stolen by the same government next – freedom of the press and then freedom of speech. Then this letter will not find a press able to print it. – Noel Spaid, Del Mar

Freedom to choose is the key dimension of individual liberty, the priceless gift of our republic. Sadly, human behavior tends to erode original gifts over time. The first major loss of choice was Social Security, our compulsory insurance program enacted in 1935. It might make sense for some, but why not allow American citizens to choose their insurance preference? Ditto for medical insurance. Then came unions. Unions are not un-American, but what would Jefferson think of union participation as a condition of employment? Again, let the citizens choose.

Sometimes we get it right. In 1973 The Supreme Court affirmed a mother’s right to decide, with her doctor, how to deal with an unwanted or accidental unborn child. Free choice. Her faith might require that the child be born, which is also her choice. Not all citizens observe the same faith.

We can’t have choice in everything. We can’t choose to harm another, or take something that belongs to someone else. But let us jealously guard our right of choice when it is inside our laws. – Andy Kremm, Liberty Station

Hall misses a most important point. Not only people of some religious faiths, but many with no religious persuasion at all, adamantly object to paying for contraception provided in the new medical law. Religion aside, contraception is solely an individual decision and responsibility, and service is available to those who need financial assistance without forcing those with moral objections to pay for it. – Sharon Conklin, Carlsbad

Huddle on anti-tax pledge

According to The Associated Press, Grover Norquist met with some Republican U.S. Congress members concerning the “pledge” they had signed “to help them understand exactly what it is they signed.” (“Anti-tax pledge author meets with House GOP,” Campaign 2012, June 23). These are people we place our trust in to draft, discuss and vote on bills and acts at the highest level of our government!? Heaven help us, because those legislators surely can’t! – Gary Nelson, San Diego

Nuclear power not a safe alternative

I vote to pay my share of my utility bill to decommission San Onofre and Diablo Canyon and to build more power grids that will eventually deliver clean, sustainable and cheap energy that will power our children and grandchildren safely into the 21st century.

The alternative of a nuclear disaster is simply not an alternative.

Maybe someday humans will be able to safely handle nuclear energy, but respectfully, that day has not yet arrived.

Fortunately for us we have access to abundant solar energy beaming down on our deserts that can safely be turned into electricity without risk of an environmental catastrophe along with abundant supplies of natural gas now selling for the energy equivalent low price of $15 a barrel of oil.

I think Southern California Edison would be exercising prudent business practices by not restarting San Onofre and by filling the Sunrise Powerlink with electricity produced from solar energy when it becomes available and in the meantime abundant and cheap natural gas.

Just think of all the good paying jobs this endeavor will create right here in Southern California?

The decision not to restart San Onofre has my support. I hope the U-T will give [the] decision its support. – Norm Blumenthal, San Diego

Empty rhetoric on state budget

The news that the governor and Legislature had reached a budget agreement (“Brown, Democrats strike budget deal,” June 22) had one thing missing. Despite Gov. Brown’s tough early rhetoric on the subject, there was no indication of any cuts to state workers’ pay or benefits, only cuts to schools, universities and social services.

There was also no indication that the bullet-train boondoggle won’t keep charging along regardless of California’s financial outlook. It’s hard to believe that voters will respond favorably to this budget deal by voting to impose higher sales and income taxes this November. – Bill Bradshaw, Mission Beach

Does anyone know why only police, firefighters and teachers are the only ones that get laid off? If you listen to politicians at all levels of government, these three groups are the first to go.

Why not lay off the those extra staff members (friends of the family), that third, fourth or fifth extra person that had to be hired because the required two people will not or cannot do the job? These “extras” people can be found in almost every department because when it comes time to submit a departmental budget they put in a little extra money in case they cut the proposal, and when then don’t cut it, department heads run out and hire more unneeded people. What the heck, it’s on taxpayer money and there will be more from where that came from! – Richard Anaya, Lakeside

Improving park’s pedestrian experience

I am a frequent visitor to the westside dog park off of the Cabrillo Bridge in Balboa Park and I often walk through the central part of the park with my two dogs. The plaza restoration project that the Planning Commission recently approved is a much-needed improvement. I cannot tell you how many times I have almost been run over in the main plazas.

I know that there are people who want to stop this proposal, but that is shortsighted and unfortunate. Getting cars out of the park core makes sense. The people in support of this plan have the right idea about how to improve the pedestrian experience. I hope your City Council sees this plan for what it is, a realistic plan to make this vision come true, and I hope that they vote in favor of it. – Leo Alcala, Hillcrest

Animated movie missed target

In response to “ ‘Brave’ drubs ‘Abe’ at weekend box office” (June 25): This grandma of a 7-year-old girl was disappointed. The critics’ inflated message of female liberation missed its target: us. The child laughed at some antics but could not understand the destructive mayhem of the warriors. “Because they’re guys, and because they’re drunk” would have been my explanation, and the ending was a confusing letdown. As promised, the landscapes were beautiful in a Kinkade-ish way, but the square-shaped doltish men struck me as lazy and gross. For our $17, we also endured a solid 40 minutes of advertising, so noisy that even my granddaughter said, “I think I’m going to pop my ears.” Altogether, over-hyped. – Margaret Agne, Rancho Bernardo

Honor the rule of law

In response to Joel Hepner (Letters, June 23): In my letter to the editor (published June 19), I clearly stated that my objection to Obama’s [immigration] fiat was based on his (Obama’s) disregard for the rule of law. The Constitution is not a mere “methodology,” as Mr. Hepner seems to imply. It is the foundation on which our liberties are based. It is what Obama swore to uphold when he took office.

Mr. Hepner should hope that the rules that are finally enacted regarding immigration reform are based on the will of the people through the actions of their elected representatives, not through the arbitrary actions of a single person. Sorry, I have no intention of “getting accustomed” to living in a dictatorship. – Nadja O’Hagan, Escondido

The gloating in Joel Hepner’s letter is palpable, reminiscent of the tone of Gavin Newsome’s “It’s gonna happen, whether you like it or not” speech. He asks Nadja O’Hagan where she will run when the U.S. becomes as morally bankrupt as the rest of the world.

He is right about one thing. No matter which of the two major parties runs the country, America will continue on its current path; with increasing velocity. It’s like another unstoppable, irreversible process: putrefaction. I would ask Mr. Hepner, “Why are you so happy about that?” – Salvatore Scafidi, San Diego

A lesson in contrasts

Teacher Sharon Collins’ letter (utsandiego.com, June 21) selflessly calls for higher taxes for education, citing socialist Sweden as her shining light. She didn’t do her homework.

She thinks Sweden values education more than America because they have a 25 cent sales tax (actually a VAT tax). But that high tax tells us nothing.

For a meaningful comparison, look at education spending per student. Of the 32 OECD countries (the economically advanced countries of the world) providing data, in 2008 Sweden ranks sixth in primary-school per-student spending; the U.S. fifth. Sweden ranks ninth in secondary-school spending, the U.S. ranks fourth.

Sweden spent $9,080 per primary-school student; the U.S. spent $9,940. Sweden spent $9,940 per secondary-school student; the U.S. spent $12,007.

Think that’s not a fair comparison? Compare spending as a percent of GDP. Sweden spends 4 percent of GDP on K-12 education. The U.S. spends 4.1 percent – without a 25 cent “sales tax.” The OECD average is 3.8 percent.

But here’s the kicker: Since 1993 Sweden has had a full-blown school voucher system. ANY parent can take the money spent on public schools and use it for sending their kids to private schools – religious or secular.

All Swedish schools compete for students, making the kids’ education a higher priority than the welfare of the school employees. While controversial when first adopted, education vouchers are now a nonissue in Sweden, as almost everyone supports the common sense choice and competition that this option offers.

No solutions stated

Your June 21 editorial, “There is no joy in San Diego schools deal,” states the litany of problems the schools still face in San Diego by the labor agreement struck recently but stated no solutions to the problems that still plague our schools. When is someone actually going to do something to resolve these growing problems?

Why has the cost of education spiraled out of control way ahead of inflation? I have yet to hear a plausible explanation. Student loans are crippling our young people.

I have been involved in education as an adjunct professor at SDSU and recently, a volunteer at Crawford Educational Complex. Both institutions are a mess!

That does not mean I have not seen both outstanding teachers and administrators at both organizations. There are many.

However, thanks to tenure, there are also many professors, teachers and administrators who have no business calling themselves educators. They hide behind their tenure. These so-called educators must be replaced by qualified, caring professionals.

We all know the importance of a good education and how bad the system is right now but no one does anything about it. The politicians and educators talk the talk but do not walk the walk!

I believe the media, the business community and parents have to be more involved in the solutions to our educational problems. It is obvious to all concerned that educators and politicians are not going to solve the complex problems that are only getting worse instead of better. – Howard Oleff, Del Cerro

Pension smoothing reduces rate volatility

Your editorial “Needed: A Constructive CalPERS” (utsandiego.com, May 20) and its conclusions are simply wrong and lack an understanding about public pensions.

CalPERS decision to give the state of California and all our public agency employers the ability to pay recent increased pension costs over a two-year period is a recognition of the challenging fiscal environment. In fact, the practice of smoothing out pension payments is a standard in the public-pension industry. Smoothing reduces rate volatility, which public employers appreciate because it results in greater predictability of future retirement costs.

Paying for pensions is similar to buying a house; there are many acceptable and reasonable ways to pay for it. A homebuyer can pay cash or take out a 15-year or 30-year mortgage. Is a fixed-rate or adjustable-rate mortgage a better option? It depends on the purchaser’s financial circumstances and expectations about the future. In the end, the purchaser pays the full cost regardless of payment method.